I welcome the Minister of State, Joe O'Brien.
Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2023: Second Stage
Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
It is a pleasure to be able to bring this Bill before Seanad Éireann. The main purpose of the Bill is to give legislative effect to several of the very substantial improvements in social protection that were announced on budget day. In addition, this year, we are introducing a set of provisions to implement the biggest ever structural reform of the State pension system, which has been agreed by the Government in response to the recommendations of the Pensions Commission.
We all agree that at the heart of our social protection system, and any worthwhile social protection system, is ensuring that the most vulnerable are cared for adequately and are able to participate in our society in a meaningful way. That is why I take great encouragement from the assessment of this budget by the Parliamentary Budget Office, which stated:
... tax and welfare measures in Budget 2024 are very progressive from a distributional impact perspective, with lower income households gaining more proportionately than middle and upper-income households. The increase in core welfare rates and qualified child increases are key drivers of this.
As well as continuing with significant increases in basic rates of social welfare payments, we have once again secured a comprehensive set of one-off payments, including the Christmas bonus, which is being paid this week to over 1.3 million recipients. There will be another double payment for those recipients in January 2024 as well as one-off payments for recipients of working family payment, disability and carers' payments, living alone allowance, fuel allowance and child benefit and those in receipt of an increase for qualified children. These measures do not require primary legislation and are therefore not included in the Bill. All this amounts to the biggest ever social protection budget package in the history of the State, with almost €1.3 billion committed in a full year annually for ongoing supports and over €1.2 billion allocated for one-off payments.
The pensions reforms in the Bill give legislative effect to the Government's response to the recommendations of the Pensions Commission. They include that long-term carers are provided with contributions for gaps in their social insurance records.
This will help to ensure thousands of people, mainly women, who have spent time caring for loved ones for more than 20 years will now be able to qualify for the State contributory pension. The introduction of this entitlement rightly reflects the important contribution of these carers to their families and society.
The pension reforms also include provisions that allow people who want to work longer to defer their pension and receive a higher rate of payment by doing so. This is just a voluntary deferment and pensionable age remains at 66. The measure will be particularly useful for people who reach pension age and find they are short the required number of contributions. These people will have the option to work for an extra year or two to enhance their PRSI contribution record and qualify for a higher pension payment.
Also included in the pension reforms are provisions for a transition to the total contributions approach to calculating pension entitlements, which will be implemented on a phased basis over a period of ten years. This approach means a fairer and more transparent system whereby a person's lifetime contributions will be more closely reflected in the benefit they can expect to receive.
There are 53 sections in the Bill, which I will now describe for the House.
Section 1 provides for the Short Title and commencement provisions.
Section 2 provides for definitions of relevant Acts.
Section 3 is a provision to allow employers to collect PRSI contributions on any gain arising from employee share options. Currently, both the tax and PRSI returns are made on a self-assessment basis by the employee.
Sections 4, 5 and 6 provide for a €12 increase in the weekly rate of maternity benefit, adoptive benefit and paternity benefit, from €262 to €274, from 2 January 2023.
Section 7 provides for the extension of the parent's benefit from seven weeks to nine weeks from August 2024. This means both parents can take up to nine weeks' paid leave each in the first two years of a child's life.
Section 8 provides for a €12 increase in the weekly rate of parent's benefit, from €262 to €274, from 2 January 2024.
Section 9 is to give effect to the increases in the graduated rates of jobseeker's benefit and jobseeker's benefit for the self-employed.
Section 10 is a technical amendment. It requires the substitution of "illness benefit" for "disability benefit", which is the current name for the scheme.
Section 11 provides clarity that jobseeker's assistance is paid on the basis of a six-day week.
Section 12 is a technical amendment to correct incorrect textual references.
Section 13 provides for an extension of the child benefit to 18-year-olds in full-time education from September 2024. With many children now starting primary school at age five and an increase in pupils doing transition year, there has been an increase in the number of 18-year-olds still in secondary education. Many here would prefer if the measure could be implemented from the start of the calendar year. Nevertheless, it is important to remember it represents a long-term change for the better and will support families into the future.
Section 14 provides for a €54 increase in the weekly income thresholds for the working family payment for all family sizes, ensuring more families can qualify for this important payment.
Section 15 makes changes regarding the credit union personal microcredit loan, known as the "It Makes Sense" loan. This includes allowing for the maximum amount of the loan to be increased from €2,000 to €5,000.
Section 16 is a technical amendment to replace references to "old age (contributory) pension" with "State pension (contributory)", which is the current name of the scheme.
Section 17 and Schedule 1 provide for increases in the rates of social insurance payments, including a €12 per week increase in the personal rate of benefit. They also provide for an increase in regard to qualified adults and qualified children, where relevant.
Section 18 is a technical amendment to correct a reference in the supplementary welfare allowance provisions.
Section 19 and Schedule 2 provide for increases in the rates of means-tested payments, including a €12 per week increase in the personal rate, as well as increases for qualified adults and children.
Section 20 provides for an increase in the monthly rate of payment of the domiciliary care allowance, from €330 to €340, from 1 January 2024.
Part 3 concerns the interaction between statutory sick pay legislation and social welfare legislation. The main purpose of these amendments is to ensure illness benefit and injury benefit are not paid on days for which statutory sick pay is paid by a person's employer and to make arrangements for payment of statutory sick pay where an absence spans the end of a year.
Section 21 means a person would not be able to avail of two separate periods of statutory sick leave for a single absence from work due to illness that spans the year end.
Section 22 is a technical amendment to correct a referencing error in the Workplace Relations Act 2015.
Section 23 inserts definitions regarding statutory sick pay into the Social Welfare Consolidation Act.
Section 24 provides that a customer entitled to statutory sick pay from their employer cannot have a concurrent entitlement to the illness benefit.
Section 25 allows people with a reduced PRSI contribution record to be paid the illness benefit for a period of 312 days, including days in receipt of statutory sick pay.
Section 26 amends the current legislation to ensure long-standing illness benefit recipients who have an entitlement to statutory sick pay from their employer cannot have a concurrent entitlement to illness benefit.
Sections 27 and 28 mirror the illness benefit provisions regarding occupational injury benefit, OIB. OIB is a scheme for people injured by an accident at work or who contract a disease related to work. As with the illness benefit, an employee is not entitled to be paid statutory sick pay and OIB at the same time.
Part 4 carries a number of provisions to give effect to important State pension reforms that I referred to. These relate to enhanced pension provision for long-term carers, the introduction of a voluntary system of pension deferral, and the phased transition to a total contributions approach for qualifying for a contributory State pension. There are also consequential changes to PRSI provisions.
Sections 29 to 34, inclusive, relate to the changes required to social insurance contributions in light of the introduction of the option to defer drawing down the contributory State pension. Currently, a person's liability for PRSI ceases on reaching 66. However, for those who turn 66 from January 2024 and choose to defer drawing down their contributory State pension, the social insurance rules need to accommodate a later date for this liability to cease. This will be the date the person is awarded their contributory State pension or when they reach the age of 70, whichever comes first.
Section 30 changes the criteria relevant to becoming an employed contributor for the purposes of the Act. This now extends the criteria past age 66 until a person is awarded the contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 31 relates to the payment of employee contributions on the exercise of employee share options. Again, this provision extends the criteria past age 66 until a person is awarded the contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 32 relates to the criteria relevant to becoming a self-employed contributor for the purposes of the Act. Again, this provision extends the criteria past age 66 until a person is awarded the contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 33 relates to the criteria relevant to becoming a voluntary contributor for the purposes of the Act. This amendment extends the criteria for becoming a voluntary contributor to those over 66 until they are awarded the contributory State pension or reach 70, whichever comes first.
Section 34 amends section 25 of the Act and is connected to the previous amendment for voluntary contributors and provides for a similar extension to those over 66.
Sections 35 to 43, inclusive, relate to the changes required to certain social welfare benefits in light of the introduction of the option to defer drawing down the contributory State pension. Currently, a person's entitlement to most social welfare benefits ceases on reaching age 66 and they become eligible for a State pension. However, for those who turn 66 in January 2024 and choose to defer drawing their contributory State pension, the provisions relating to some of these benefits need to change to accommodate access to support for short-term contingencies, such as illness or job loss. For those who reach 66 in January 2024, instead of the benefits ceasing at age 66, these benefits will cease at the date on which the person is awarded their contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first. As there may be people in receipt of one of these social welfare benefits when they turn 66, they will be given an option to remain on that payment if their intention is to choose to defer their contributory State pension, provided they make an application to do so.
Section 35 relates to eligibility for the illness benefit and provides that instead of the benefit ceasing at age 66, eligibility will cease on the date the person is awarded their contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 36 allows a person in receipt of the illness benefit on reaching 65 to apply to remain on the benefit.
Section 37 relates to eligibility for the partial capacity benefit. As with the change to illness benefit, this provides that instead of the benefit ceasing at age 66, eligibility will cease on the date the person is awarded their contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 38 provides that if people on the partial capacity benefit are approaching their 66th birthday, they must apply to remain in receipt of it. The position on the illness benefit is similar.
Section 39 relates to the eligibility for the jobseeker's benefit and provides that, instead of the benefit ceasing at age 66, eligibility will cease on the date the person is awarded their contributory State pension or reaches 70, whichever comes first.
Section 40 is a technical amendment to allow the jobseeker's benefit to be claimed up to 70 years of age.
Section 41 provides that, as with the illness and partial capacity benefits, a person must, if they choose to do so, apply to remain on the payment on reaching age 66.
Sections 42 and 43 relate to eligibility for jobseeker's benefit for the self-employed and mirror the same changes made to jobseeker's benefit.
Section 44 amends section 108 of the Act to provide for the expansion of the eligibility criteria for the contributory State pension to now include those up to the age of 70. The provision also provides for an entitlement to a higher rate of pension at the relevant age of claiming, whether it is 67, 68, 69 or 70.
Section 45 provides for attributing contributions to long-term carers who have been caring for an incapacitated person for more than 20 years. This is achieved by attributing the equivalent of paid contributions to these long-term carers to cover gaps in their contribution record for the purposes of the contributory pension. The section outlines the criteria to be met to qualify for long-term carer’s contributions. These criteria are based on the existing caring requirements on other schemes such as carer’s allowance and carer’s benefit. The section provides for the contributions to be attributed to those who reach the age of 66 in January but also those who are already past the age of 66. We launched a system for registering for these long-term caring contributions in September. Members may also have heard the advertisements on the radio. I encourage anyone who is or has been a long-term carer to register these periods through mywelfare.ie.
Section 46 enables long-term carer’s contributions to be considered as qualifying contributions towards the contributory pension. The section also amends the qualifying conditions to take into account contributions after the age of 66 when calculating the contributory pension. Section 46(1)(b) provides for managing the situation where a person may be in receipt of a payment from the Department after age 66 while seeking to avail of a higher rate of pension at a future date. The duration that the person is in receipt of one of the relevant payments in Schedule 5A will reduce the age at claim for any higher rate of pension by an equivalent period. This section also sets out the substantive and consequential changes required to the Act to provide for the ten-year phased transition to the total contributions approach, or the aggregate contributions approach as it is called in the Act. The Commission on Pensions recommended the full transition to a total contributions approach only and the abolition of the yearly average approach to be implemented as soon as possible with a transition period of ten years. This will eliminate the anomalies inherent in the current yearly average system, for example where a person joins the social insurance scheme at 55 and gets a full pension versus a person who has worked on and off for 39 years since school and may only get a 90% pension. During the ten-year transition period, a person’s pension will be calculated using two methods and the person will be granted a pension using the higher of these two calculations. The section also makes a consequential amendment to regulations that can be made for long-term care-giving qualifying contributions as they apply to those with modified social insurance contributions.
Section 47 takes into account that a self-employed contributor may defer claiming their pension until attaining the age of 70.
Section 48 amends section 111 of the Act, which relates to the rate of contributory State pension payable. There will be five rates of payment for State pension, depending on the age a person is when he or she draws down the pension. These rates will be set out in the budget annually and based on actuarial factors, which will be reviewed every five years in line with the actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund. Where the actuarial factors change based on any future review, a lead-in time to notify future pensioners will be provided. They will give approximate rates based on the January 2024 rate of the contributory State pension of €277.30 as follows: €290.30 at age 67; €304.80 at age 68; €320.30 at age 69; and €337.20 at age 70. The increase for a qualified adult at each stage will also be adjusted. Once a person claims his or her pension, he or she will remain on that rate for life, subject to any budget changes. A person’s rate of payment will be the same regardless of whether he or she claims the pension from his or her birthday - for example, at the age of 67 years - or at any time prior to his or her next birthday.
Section 49 removes any ambiguity that an individual who automatically transfers from invalidity pension to the State contributory pension on reaching the age of 66 will receive the age-referenced rate for the age of 66 years as is the current practice.
Sections 50 and 51 relate to eligibility for, and duration of, the back to work family dividend. These provisions mirror the equivalent amendments to the illness benefit, partial capacity benefit and jobseeker's benefit set out in sections 35 to 41.
Section 52 provides for the insertion of rates of the State contributory pension for ages 66, 67, 68, 69 and 70 into Schedule 2.
Section 53 provides for the insertion of a new Schedule 5A into the Act, setting out the specified weekly payments that will reduce the rate of deferred pension if incurred over the age of 66.
I believe the provisions of this Bill and other measures announced on budget day will continue to provide much-needed financial assistance to those who are struggling to make ends meet. It also lays the foundation for a more sustainable pensions system, where we can continue to maintain the pension age at age 66. Providing long-term carers with entitlement to a contributory State pension has been a key priority of this Government and I am glad now to be involved in delivering on that commitment.
The 101st year since the foundation of our State is drawing to a close. The measures in this Bill reflect the values of a modern State, namely, compassion and concern for people who need it most. The budget measures are targeted at the vulnerable. The long-term carers contribution is an ambitious step-change by this Government on behalf of carers. It acknowledges the self-sacrifice made by family carers. I look forward to hearing the contributions from Senators on the Bill. With that, a Chathaoirleach, I commend the Bill to the House.
I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I thank the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, for the Bill. I commiserate with her on the recent death of her mother. I presume that is the reason that she is not here today.
I would like to pick up on the Minister of State's last point. Regardless of the age at which a person draws down his or her pension - it may be 66 or 70 - if a person has ten years of contributions and draws the minimum at pension age, is his or her ten years calculated when he or she is 70 years of age? Is that pension based on the age of 66 years or is it based on the age of 70 years at that stage? Is it based on the higher rate or on the lower rate?
The Bill is designed to give legislative effect to a range of social welfare measures announced in the budget of 10 October 2023. We heard the Minister of State outlining all the various increases here today. We must have the best social welfare system in the world. Looking at other countries, I cannot come up with any country that has as good a social welfare system as we have here in Ireland. I suppose that is down to this Government as well as other governments over the years. We have a very generous social welfare system. We see that with the number of immigrants who want to come here from other countries. They do not want to go to other countries. Do they want to come here because of our social welfare system? It certainly is not for the weather that we are getting at the moment.
The Bill also provides for an interaction between the Sick Leave Act 2022 and the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, the main purpose of which is to ensure that illness benefit and injury benefits are not paid on days for which statutory sick pay is paid by a person's employer. The Bill also provides for certain reforms to the State contributory pension, provides in certain circumstances for long-term carers to qualify for the State contributory pension and introduces flexibility to the State contributory pension to allow a person to defer claiming the State contributory pension up to the age of 70. That relates to the question I asked the Minister of State to clarify, on whether a person will draw the minimum pension because we know that some people only qualify for the minimum in certain circumstances; for example, where they did not pay contributions when they were younger for one reason or another.
I raised an issue here last year in regard to jury service and I have not got any decision on it yet. That is where a person is between jobs, leaving one job to go to another job. It does not happen in many cases. This may be the first case where it happened, whereby a person left one job and went to another job and during the week in between was called for jury service. There was no obligation on the previous employer to pay that week's wages and there was no obligation on the new employer to pay it. There was hardship involved for the person in this case. They have household bills and a mortgage to pay but they were left out of pocket for the week. Will the Minister of State see what has happened in such cases previously because there was hardship in this case? Social welfare should make some contribution towards the person involved.
The person went to the Courts Service and put their case, but they were not excused and had to attend for jury service.
Another issue that has been raised on numerous occasions by several Members of the House relates to K class contributions. Very few people now pay such contributions. Local councillors paid K class and a previous Minister for Social Welfare changed the K class to the S class, which resulted in issues for people benefiting from paying K class. The only people now paying K class contributions are Oireachtas Members and judges, as far as I understand it. There are no benefits. One would wonder why Oireachtas Members and judges pay K class contributions. Civil servants no longer pay these contributions. They have been removed from the system. I ask that the Minister take a look at this before we come back to Committee Stage next week.
The Minister has brought in very generous increases in the budget. There has been an increase from €262 to €274 for maternity, adoptive and parental leave. The old age contributory pension has been increased on a pro rata basis. The Minister has outlined a raft of other increases and benefits for people that were introduced in the budget. We have a very generous social welfare system. It is great that the State can afford to pay these generous benefits. The double allowance is very welcome for those who will receive it this month. Another double allowance will be paid in January. There are payments for electricity. All of these payments are very welcome.
There is a lot of hardship out there and we are living in an economy with high inflation, which, thankfully, is now under control. As I have said, we have a very generous social welfare system. I wish the Minister well. We can go into more detail on Committee Stage next week. I welcome the Bill and look forward to Committee Stage next week.
The Minister is welcome. First and foremost, I want to congratulate him and the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on what has been a very good social welfare budget. It clearly set out to look after the less well-off in our society, which is really good.
I want to devote my time today to speaking about class K PRSI. I delivered a rapporteur's report on class K PRSI in 2016, which I have here and which I will make available to the Minister. Let us talk about social insurance. Social insurance is about the many contributing to look after the few. People who get sick, become infirm or are of old age are looked after through the social insurance system. Is anybody in this country willing to pay for an insurance policy that they can never draw down anything from? Anybody paying class K PRSI can never ever benefit from the social protection system. My colleague, Senator Burke, is 100% correct. Many thousands of people were paying class K contributions, but there are now around 1,000 or 1,200 people in the State paying it. It mainly applies to members of the Judiciary and Members of the Oireachtas.
Most of us in the Oireachtas are in what might be regarded as precarious employment. At any stage, the electorate can decide it has had enough of us and off we go into the sunset. Take the election of 2020 as an example. A number of Members of this House and the Lower House lost their seats in the middle of a pandemic. They found themselves unemployed. They had paid 4% of their salary throughout their term in the Oireachtas, yet they had no recourse to social protection or welfare payments when they found themselves unemployed. We were in the middle of a pandemic, so they could not look for work. That is simply unacceptable.
When I saw the PRSI being paid by county councillors, I raised a High Court action as a defendant, along with the number of county councillors. The case was never heard; it was settled outside the High Court. It was settled on the basis that class K PRSI is unconstitutional. There is no way on God's earth that the Minister's Department can justify the taking 4% of my salary from an insurance perspective and giving me absolutely nothing for it.
Not only that, by taking class K PRSI the Minister has eliminated me from all of the social protection guarantees that are available. I do not get dental or optical benefits or a contributory old age pension. If I do get such a pension, it will be impacted by virtue of the fact that I do not have the required number of contributions over the period stated. It is, in fact, a tax on public service for judges and Members of the Oireachtas. That has been accepted by the Department when it came to county councillors. It is now time to rectify the situation and decide whether Members of this House should be on class S, class A or whatever class the Minister wants. Ultimately, the Department should not take money out of our salaries and deny us the same protections that every other employee in the country is entitled to.
Moreover, in this precarious employment, irrespective of what age we are, we pay full PRSI. We will continue to do so until we go to the grave or are kicked out of the House. That is simply unacceptable. We are workers, the same as any other workers in the country. It is my intention to bring forward a number of amendments in the coming days. This simply cannot continue. It is wrong. The Department knows it is wrong, otherwise why would it have settled the case with the county councillors? It would not have settled it had it known they were right because the State is well known for fighting cases to the bitter end and, in some cases, fighting until such time as the plaintiff dies rather than settle.
In the case of class K PRSI and county councillors, the State settled straight away. Even in settling the case and moving county councillors to class S, the State denied them the retrospective recognition of the PRSI they had paid. Members of local authorities who moved to class A were still not able to avail of a full contributory old age pension, dental and optical benefits and the like. Moving people onto class S is not enough. The Department has taken 4% of our salary, the same as it takes from every other employee in the country.
People watching this today will say, "Bloody politicians looking after themselves". Thank you. I will look after myself. It is my job to look after myself. I have a family, the same as every other worker in this country and I am entitled to look after my family and make sure they benefit from the contributions that I have made throughout my working life. From that point of view, I make no apology. I will fight for any worker in this country who is being denied something they are entitled to.
I spent a number of years of my life in trade unionism, including two years of my life at the very top of the Teachers Union of Ireland as its president. I am very much aware of the needs and rights of workers and what workers should get. Just because we put ourselves forward for election is no reason why we should hide from the justifiable allowances, supports and protections that are built into our system.
For 101 years, we have looked after workers in this country.
We have an excellent social welfare system in place. So many things were brought in as a result of the financial emergency measures in the public interest. Looking at the debate on class K, it was introduced on Report Stage of the Bill by the Minister at the time, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív. Every debate that took place questioned the legality of what was being done. Yet it was rammed through at the time. I understand why that happened. The country was in pretty dire straits. I had to explain to my members when I was president of the teachers' union why they were about to take a massive pay cut. Most workers in this country took that pay cut. We helped to build this country back up again. Why should we continue to penalise Members of this House? I cannot remember the exact number but there are five or six members of the previous Government, Dáil and Seanad who lost their seats during the election and had absolutely nothing to fall back on. That is wrong in every sense of the word.
Before people jump to all sorts of conclusions about my gold-plated pension, I am caught like every other worker in the country by the single pension Act. There are no gold-plated pensions for anybody in the public service anymore. We have destroyed public service pensions in the way we have set about them and that is why we are losing gardaí and members of the Defence Forces and why some of the high flyers in the public service are going into the private sector, because there is no benefit in remaining in the public sector anymore. I ask the Minister of State to save us all an awful lot of trouble when we bring forward amendments. I am quite happy to engage with the officials who are here with him and bring the amendments to them to try to get as smooth a passage as we can from class K to whatever other class.
I am not prepared to sit back and allow class K to continue indefinitely. I have asked for this in every budget since 2016. If I cannot get the amendments through on this occasion, I will do what I did back in 2016 and revert to the High Court and we will have it out there. For God's sake, please spare me and the State a waste of time in going down to the High Court to prove what we already know, which is that class K PRSI is unconstitutional. If you want to tax me for being a Senator, tax me. Take 4% of my salary as a tax but call it a tax and take it through the tax system, through the Revenue Commissioners. Do not take my contributions through PRSI, which I will depend on as I approach my advancing years, which are catching up on me very fast. Do not take my pension. Do not take a part of my pension. Leave me with the benefits I have been paying for all my life. Just because somebody served in the Oireachtas for five years, for that to impact their old age pension and their entitlements is criminal as far as I am concerned. I think I have ranted quite enough now. I will bring forward very calm amendments when we get to Committee Stage. I thank the Minister of State for his time.
I thank the Minister of State for joining us today. I also join in commiserating with the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on the loss of her mother.
I am sorry; I did not know.
It is always a good day when the Social Welfare Bill comes before us. This is one of the biggest budgets in the history of the State. I say that every year. This year's budget is €2.3 billion. Senator Craughwell talked about the important issue of class K, as he has every year. I am glad Fianna Fáil is part of this Government. In the next few weeks we are going to see huge lump sum payments to families who are hugely in need. There will be a double child benefit, a €400 working family payment, €300 in fuel allowance, a €200 living alone allowance and €100 per qualified child, to name a few, as well as extra supports for electricity and whatnot.
The most important part of this year's social protection Bill is the pension reforms. My colleague Senator Higgins is on maternity leave but she is probably watching this and is probably delighted to hear the ads on the radio today. I sat on the social protection committee with her in 2016 and it was one of her main priorities, as it was one of mine. We know there is deep inequality in the former system of pensions, and it especially affects women and women caring for those who cannot care for themselves. This is a huge day. When I heard the ad on the radio today, I was absolutely delighted. The Minister of State said in his speech that it is really important for us as parliamentarians to get the message out there to people. The ten-year transition period might not seem like a lot. If someone is in their 40s and they have been caring for someone for the past ten years, having a pension and the idea of becoming of pension age might not be on their radar. It is important for us to let people know this is there and they have to log in and find the time to do it. It is a welcome change. I thank the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, because I know she worked hard to get this over the line. It is wonderful for carers. It is not just politicians who have been campaigning for this but a lot of civic society groups. It is a really good day for them as well. It was one of the National Women's Council's main priorities so it will also welcome this.
The interactions between sick leave and the social welfare Bill is some sort of internal housekeeping. It is important to keep things right.
I also mention the extension of the hot school meals scheme because that is something the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, has been working on and which got support from across the House. On 5 December, 900 schools were added to the hot meals scheme. It is very important. It is something I would like to see rolled out in every school in the country. I hope we will get there. We have to start somewhere. The Minister started with a pilot and to have 900 schools now is fantastic. It makes such a difference to children, to their demeanour and to families. It takes the pressure off in the morning of trying to get lunches ready. It is simple and is a great initiative. I hope, when we are speaking about the social protection Bill next year, this will have been rolled out again. Obviously, it is not part of the social protection Bill but it is under the remit of the Department and I am just glad to see that rolled out further.
I thank the Minister of State again for coming in. I am curious about the staggered payment system as a way to encourage people to retire later. That is a new provision and we will probably be able to have more commentary in a few months when we figure out how that is working out and how people are receiving that. I thank the Minister of State again for coming to the House. As the Fianna Fáil spokesperson on social protection, I commend this Bill.
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I apologise in advance because I have to go to a committee meeting. Sinn Féin will not be opposing this Bill. In advocating for a robust social protection system, it is imperative to establish a commission similar to the Low Pay Commission. A social protection and income adequacy commission would recommend precise increases in social protection based on metrics like the minimum essential standard of living. This approach would aim to eliminate speculation and budget discussions and ensure a more informed decision-making process.
While there may be disagreement on budget priorities, Sinn Féin will not be opposing the social welfare Bill. What we will focus on is the timely delivery of increased payments to workers, individuals and families. In our alternative budget we allocated €1.7 billion to increase payments for pensioners, carers, people with disabilities and others who depend on social welfare for a wide range of reasons. This is significantly above what the Government is proposing in its budget of €1.1 billion, which is almost €500 million less. This also has to be taken in the context of the cost-of-living crisis. Some of the people who expected more will feel the Government should have acted more decisively, particularly with regard to people with disabilities and carers. They deserve much better.
People with disabilities, as we know, are at much higher risk of poverty but there was no recognition in the budget of the increased cost of disability. This is despite the fact that, for some time, the organisations at the coalface dealing with people with disabilities have identified the need for such a payment. In this context, Sinn Féin proposed a €20 weekly increase for those on disability payments instead of the €12 increase in the core rate. There was no increase either in the carer's support grant, which is very much needed.
The rising cost of raising children in Ireland, especially childcare expenses, requires more substantial support in social protection. While there are of course positive aspects, such as the extension of child benefit to those in full-time education, gaps still remain for some families.
Child benefit rates have remained unchanged since 2016. They are below 2008 levels. That needs to be reconsidered in light of inflation. In addition, the extension of free school meals is, of course, welcome. I acknowledge its importance in ensuring children’s full engagement in education.
The focus on changes to pensions influenced by the pensions commission’s report raises concerns. In the face of a cost-of-living crisis, there is a call to prioritise increasing the rate of PRSI paid by employers rather than burdening employees. The right to retire at 65 should still be a core part of the response, considering the impact on individuals who have contributed significantly over the years. There is a need to re-evaluate the proposal to increase the pension age to 67 and 68, emphasising the importance of restoring the right to retire on a State pension at 65.
While the consideration of carers’ contributions and child maintenance legislation are welcome, concerns have been raised by those affected by the adequacy of a five-year review cycle for actuarial inputs.
While supporting the legislation, there is a call for the Government to address gaps and consider certain proposals, particularly in the areas I highlighted, such as disability support, child benefit and the retirement age. Sinn Féin believes the focus should be on a more equitable and sustainable social protection system.
I join colleagues in sending condolences to the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on the sad loss of her mother.
This Bill is important for many people. The Labour Party will support it and make sure it passes through this House as quickly as possible. However, I wish to raise a number of issues with the Minister of State. I will start with carers. The first issue I wish to raise is those who may now qualify from the welcome increase in the means test will have to wait until June 2024 before they receive that payment. The Minister of State will be aware, as will the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, that the means test is an issue I have raised with the Minister a number of times both here and at the social protection committee. It is my long-held view and belief that there should be no means test on carers given the fact that Family Carers Ireland has so often told us that carers in this country are saving the State €20 billion per year. I know of a number of cases that were still outside the means test yet they continue to provide 24-7 care for their loved ones and have asked me why they have to wait a further six months while not benefiting from the promised increase.
I welcome the introduction of a carer’s credit for those who have cared for 20 years or more. However, recently I have come across two cases - both women - who worked for a number of years and then spent in one case 12 years and in the other case 15 years caring for a loved one. It is unfortunate for them that neither will not qualify for this new credit. Perhaps the Minister of State can inform us how the 20-year rule was arrived at. It seems unfair that spending 15 years caring and unable to work would now not carry any credits under this new scheme. I welcome the scheme. It is something the Labour Party has been requesting for a long time, and I have mentioned it continuously at the social protection committee. It is my understanding - perhaps the Minister of State can confirm – that particular person will not benefit from the fact that she spent 15 years caring for her late mother because she does not have the 20 years completed.
Staying with carers, I have also come across two cases in the past week relating to those on community employment, CE, schemes. It is my understanding that on a CE scheme, you must complete 19.5 hours a week to obtain a payment. I note this is something the Minister of State is very familiar with it. I have come across two cases recently where because the people are minding and potentially would become carers and are working those 19.5 hours, they would be outside the maximum rate of carers of 18.5 hours a week. These people do not qualify for carer’s allowance yet they are caring day in, day out outside of the 19.5 hours that they do on their CE scheme. Because they are working outside the 18.5-hour rule, it is my understand that they do not qualify for carer’s allowance. Perhaps the Minister of State can come back to me on that or clarify the position for us.
I am want to highlight a number of cases that came through my clinics just in the past number of weeks. I ask the Minister to comment on one case involving an increase in the living alone allowance. In this instance, the person is living alone. Their spouse has been living in a nursing home for more than ten years. They have provided a letter from the nursing home stating that their spouse would never return home and would live out their life in that nursing home. Unfortunately, they were told three weeks ago that this will not qualify them for the living alone increase even though, for all intents and purpose, they have lived ten years by themselves in that house. They provided a letter from the nursing home stating that their loved one would not be back in their own home and would live out their life in the nursing home. I consider that unfair. I ask the Minister of State to consider such circumstances in the future. We are not talking about a major number of people but there are a number of people who I believe should qualify for the living alone increase with a loved one who has lived and will live their lives out in a nursing home. They should qualify for the living alone increase.
I raise foster carers and the important role they play in the State. I am aware that the budget will result in an increase in January for the great work foster carers carry out on a daily basis in this State. However, they also must wait until November 2024 until they get the full implementation of what they truly deserve. A large number of those fostering have contacted me as to why this is the case. These people richly deserve the income. For it not to come into place for another 12 months beggars the question I am asking the Minister of State today. The Irish Foster Care Association is disappointed by this and is asking the same question.
I wish to ask another question related to foster caring that I have come across a number of times, which is again the 20-year rule for the carer’s credit. Will those in foster care qualify for this rule? I came across one case in particular where a woman spent 30-plus years helping this State by fostering children, yet when she came to the age of qualifying for a State pension, she did not qualify in her own right and was totally dependent on her husband’s pension. This is wrong. Foster carers should be included in that carer’s allowance 20-year rule. This woman would then qualify. I ask the Minister of State to comment on that and let us know whether that is the case.
I join with colleagues, as I did this morning, in welcoming the announcement of the extension of hot meals to primary schools throughout the State. In my county, Kildare, a further 28 schools will benefit from this announcement. There can be no doubt that this is a great initiative. It will make a difference for many primary schools and give a hot meal at such an important point of the day. As I said this morning when the issue was raised, there is another knock-on benefit and that is employment in this sector. I mentioned the wonderful Bradbury’s bakery in my home town that runs a wonderful service delivering hot meals to a number of schools in the area. It employs a large number of people in the town of Athy as a result. I am also aware of recent job announcements in this sector in Tipperary. It is a further example of this very welcomed announcement.
In finishing up, I welcome the extension of child benefit payments in respect of those still in secondary school through to age 18, which the Minister of State mentioned. I raised this issue with the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, this time last year. I am happy to see that is included, albeit, as the Minister of State said as well, there are people who have wait another year. I would welcome if it could be included now but it will come in in September 2024.
I cannot let the opportunity go by without mentioning the Green Paper on disability reform. I ask the Minister of State to confirm again that there has been an extension in the public consultation for a further three months. I have raised a number of concerns around this Green Paper. I am contacted regularly by people and I had a number of people in my office on Monday of last week who received letters from social protection about job activation schemes in April and May of this year. That was well before a Green Paper was announced. They have serious concerns and I can provide the letter they received. Both these people are seriously concerned about what this actually means for them, what the Green Paper will mean for them and the tiered payments as a result of that. I welcome the fact that there is an extension in public consultation. More should be done in the context of going around the country in order to explain to people what is happening. In their discussions with me on Monday, these people mentioned that Dublin, I think, Cork and Galway were the three locations that they could have gone to but, unfortunately, they could not get those places. The Minister or the Department needs to go farther around the country and have more locations with regard to trying to explain what is happening in respect of the Green Paper. They need to address many of the fears that those on disability have as a result of those announcements and the fact those people received job activation letters going back, I think, to March or April of this year.
We want to support this Bill. We believe there much good in it. I want to work with the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on ensuring this Bill goes through the House in the quickest possible time. I look forward to that happening.
I welcome the Minister of State and join with others in remembering Emily Stewart, mother of the Minister, Deputy Humphreys. May she rest in peace.
I welcome the Bill and the budget commitments that were announced in October. It is clear that a lot of the things we have been able to do as a Government is because of the strength of the economy and because these things are necessary. It is necessary to support families and individuals with the cost of living and with the inflationary pressures people have witnessed and lived with. We all see in the small shop one might do the price increases over the past numbers of years as a direct consequence of pressures on oil prices and transport costs. It is evident to everybody what is happening and the Government has been able to respond because it is the right thing to do and because we are in a position of being able to do so; that is important.
I welcome the cost-of-living measures that have been announced. The once-off payments are welcome, whether they be the lump sums for those on the fuel allowance; the living alone lump sums; the working family payment lump sum; the double payment of child benefit; the carer's support grant; the disability allowance, the blind pension, and invalidity cost-of-living lump sum; the increase to be paid per qualified child and the Christmas and January cost-of-living bonuses that will be paid.
When we look at the range of measures, as Senator Burke said we have a very large, inclusive social welfare system covering a whole range of different areas and payments. We have the back to education allowance; the back to work enterprise allowance; the back to work family dividend; the blind pension; carer's allowance and benefit; community employment; daily expenses allowance; the deserted wife's allowance and benefit; the disability allowance and benefit; domiciliary care; farm assist; guardian payment; illness benefit; invalidity pension; job initiative schemes such as the jobseeker's allowance and the jobseeker's transitional payment; the Magdalen Commission scheme; the death benefit scheme; the one parent family payment; the partial capacity; rural social schemes; the State pension - contributory and non-contributory; the supplementary welfare allowance; Tús; the widow's pension; the surviving civil partner's pension; and workplace experience programmes. There is a range of measures there. Of course people pay under social insurance for the range of these benefits. It is important to note that people are paying, and getting something back with the exception of a few notable individuals Senators Burke and Craughwell mentioned and put on record. I note Senator Craughwell's report on the issue that was commissioned by the committee a number of years ago.
I also welcome, as others have, section 30 in the Bill, which is the extension of child benefit to 18 year olds who are in full-time education from September of next year. Many children now do transition year and start school later because of the preschool system we now have in the country. Therefore more people are in education up to the age of 18 so it is right that it be extended.
I also welcome the changes related to carers and providing for contributions for long-term carers who have been caring for incapacitated persons for more than 20 years. This section provides for the contributions to be attributed to those who will reach the age of 66 in January but also those who are already past the age of 66. It is important people are aware of these changes. Advertisements are taking place through the Minister of State's Department and I ask people to register through mywelfare.ie as well in order to see those changes and benefit from them.
Overall, the pension change has allowed people who wish to continue working to be able to do so and to defer to a later age and receive a higher payment. It is important in terms of the sustainability of the pension pot that we have that some people would, if they so wish, work for longer. It is important that we keep an eye on the social contribution fund to ensure there are sufficient resources for pensions in the years ahead. A number of countries have concerns about their own capacities to pay pensions in the future so any responsible Government would keep an eye on the social insurance fund and see how trends are as regards people working and reaching retirement age. Thankfully, people are living for longer and therefore would be drawing their pensions, as they are entitled to, for longer. It is important we ensure we have the resources to pay for them into the future. Overall, I welcome the commitments in this Bill.
I thank Senators for their constructive engagement. I will do my best to answer queries. To answer Senator Burke's initial question, the pension will be based on the higher rate. On the jury service issue we will talk to the Minister for Justice regarding giving an allowance in the circumstances he outlined. With regards to Senators Burke's and Craughwell's point about class K PRSI, prior to its introduction in 2011, public officeholders did not pay PRSI on the income they received in that capacity. Under budget 2011 a 4% charge effective from 1 January 2011 was introduced on the remuneration received by public officeholders in that capacity regardless of age provided that income exceeds €5,200 per annum. It should be noted that public officeholders may establish entitlement to social insurance benefits based on income generated other than as a public officeholder. Where they have exited insurable employment or self-employment public officeholders can, subject to satisfying the qualifying conditions, pay voluntary contributions under that scheme. I note Senator Craughwell's points and will certainly feed them back to the Minister, Deputy Humphreys.
With regard to Senator Ardagh's comments, the plan is to roll out school meals. The programme has grown very significantly in the last few years. This budget has seen another large jump. The plan is to have school meals widely available. That will take time but we are accelerating quite quickly in that regard. As for some of Senator Boylan's points she noted child benefit has not increased but I would argue that the increase for a qualified child is a much more effective and targeted payment and that has been increasing incrementally over the years.
As regards minimum essential standard of living, MESL, the Senator will be aware of the work of the Vincentian MESL Research Centre which is sponsored by my Department as an assessment of the minimum income needed to partake in everyday life. The work of the MESL Research Centre also highlights issues that may be better solved with greater access to services rather than increases in income. In this regard having access to secondary benefits such as medical cards and supports in the areas of housing and childcare can result in significant reductions in the minimum income standards needed by households. This presents another difficulty in using the MESL as a benchmark for the level of social welfare payments alone. The work of the Vincentian MESL Research Centre is and will continue to be a valued input to our policy-making process. On an annual basis my Department already assesses the social impact of the annual budget process including in recent years the impact of once-off measures. I commit that we will publish a detailed social impact assessment of budget 2024 including the main tax and welfare measures using the ESRI's SWITCH microsimulation model by quarter 1 of next year.
The Department also has a three-year joint research programme on poverty and social inclusion with the ESRI. As part of this programme the ESRI is currently working on a technical paper examining the relationship with the MESL income standards and the Central Statistics Office's, CSO's, at risk of poverty thresholds. This will be published in 2024 and will add further to the evidence base on the relationship between MESL and poverty thresholds. At this stage we do not propose to set up another commission.
Senator Wall had a lot of good questions. The carer's allowance means test changed last year. Some €50,000 of capital is still allowable to get the full carer's allowance. The carer's benefit and the domiciliary care allowance are not mean tested. As for the CE issue I will take that away for the moment. The carer's and 20 year issues, in terms of the long-term carer's contributions, is based on the recognition that someone caring for this period of time will face greater challenges in building up the eligibility criteria of 520 paid contributions. If the claimant has cared for fewer than 20 years the period will be registered and used for a State pension. If and when they have additional periods which accumulate to 20 years or more the person with fewer than 20 years of caring may be entitled to avail of home caring periods and the homemaker's scheme subject to the existing qualifying conditions of having the 520 paid contributions.
Regarding the foster care payment, there has been some increase, but the majority of it will come next year. I am aware of this. Ultimately, it was a budgetary matter. Obviously, we would want more sooner. I acknowledge the role of foster carers.
The new long-term carers contribution is for long-term carers of incapacitated dependents and not specifically for foster carers. However, where a foster carer is caring for a child who comes within the definition and period in this context, the new arrangement may apply to a foster carer for the relevant duration of that care.
Senator Wall made several comments in respect of the Green Paper on disability. I was in the Dáil this morning taking questions on this matter. I confirm that we have extended the consultation period. I reiterate, as I did this morning, that this is a Green Paper, a consultation process, and about us in the Department listening. We have travelled around the country, and we need to do more of this. I know people were gathered outside the Dáil earlier, and making their points as well. We must listen to those points. This is my clear message to the Senators today. I know there are concerns in terms of how things were done in the UK. The clear message I want to give on this point is that it is not the UK system that we are proposing.
The Senator also raised the fact that some people he met had received letters from the Department in April. The objective of these letters was really to highlight the supports available, including for education, training and employment, for disabled people. These supports are entirely voluntary, and this should have been the tone of the letter, to my knowledge anyway. There is no requirement in this regard. I repeat that there is no requirement for anyone to engage, but it is important that people with disabilities are aware of the supports available to them, should they wish to access them.
If any issues are outstanding, I ask the Senators to please follow up with me. I thank them for their contributions.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?
Next Tuesday.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 12 December 2023.
When is it proposed to sit again?
Next Tuesday at 11 a.m.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar athló ar 2.22 p.m. go dtí 11 a.m., Dé Máirt, an 12 Nollaig 2023.
The Seanad adjourned at 2.22 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, 12 December 2023.